Destruction of Takshashila – a defining moment

The theory that Huns destroyed Takshashila in 5th century is a theory with no legs – and a case without evidence. So … then what could have happened?

Julian Monastery, Takshashila

The importance of Takshashila

As the oldest university in the world, Takshashila has a special place in the history of the world. More so, in Indian history. It’s destruction (purportedly) at the hands of the Hunas, as proposed by Western historians (and their followers) has been rather facile – to say the least.

There is evidence that the truth may be otherwise. This post lays out an alternative scenario, but before that let us refresh ourselves with the history of Takshashila.

According to a story contained in the Mujma-t-Tawarikh a twelfth-century Persian translation from the Arabic version of a lost Sanskrit work, thirty thousand Brahmans with their families and retinue had in ancient times been collected from all over India and had been settled in Sindh, under Duryodhana, the King of Hastinapur. (from Al-Hind, the Making of the Indo-Islamic World By André Wink).

Students paid upto 1000 coins in advance to receive education at Takshashila – and there were thousands of such students. Students came from all over the world – and paid large sums of money to Indian teachers for education! Kings, brahmans, commoners – all came to study at Takshashila. Its alumni included all the stars of the Indian firmament – Atreya, Pasenadi, Mahali, Patanajali, Jivaka, Panini, Kautilaya, Prasenjita.

Its development and importance lay in the fact that,

Takshashila and Purushpura on either side of the Sindhu river were connected with the Indian trade routes on the Indian side and Central Asian trade routes on the other. Strategically located, Takshashila, the capital of Gandhar, was the terminus of several inland routes and the starting points of the great trade routes connecting India and Central Asia. (from India and Central Asia By J. N. Roy, Braja Bihārī Kumāra, Astha Bharati (Organization)).

Based on subsequent excavation and diggings, it is thought that Takshashila was the oldest city in South Asia – when Alexander landed there. So Takshashila’s historic and cultural importance is too high to become a victim of slip-shod colonial propaganda – posing as history.

How could Fa Hien miss meeting /mentioning Kalidasa – supposedly a contemporary of Fa Hien? In fact, Kalidasa is not mentioned at all in Fa Hian’s account, which supports the hypotheses that Kalidasa preceded Fa Hian. It may be pointed out that since, Kalidasa’s works are artistic rather than religious or philosophical, the lack of Fa Hain’s interest in his works is obvious. But to ignore a man of Kalidasa’s stature and learning?

And that leaves Indian history with some rather big ‘dating’ holes! Is it that Fa hian visited India much after Kalidasa, the Gupta dynasty, the death of Buddha? Maybe a few centuries later, relative to the period in Indian history. Fa Hian’s date is well indexed. So that possibly cannot move much. It is the the corresponding Indic dates which come into question!

Another Chinese traveller, Sung Yun, who had a rather exalted view of his country and its ruler, is largely responsible for overly negative image of the Hunas in ‘modern’ history. Sung-Yun’s peeve – the Huna king did not read the letter from the Wei Tartar king standing, but in a seated position. A modern historian writing on the spread of Buddhism and Buddhist traveller’s tales thinks that,

Like most things India it (Buddhism) suffered somewhat from the invasions of the Huns, who dominated many parts of the northwest from 480 to 530; but the immediate effect of their depredations does not seem to have been very striking. At any rate, the Chinese pilgrim Sung Yun, who travelled through this region in 518-21, gives us a picture in which Buddhism is quite as thriving as it was in Fa-Hien’s time. (from The Pilgrimage of Buddhism and a Buddhist Pilgrimage By James Bissett Pratt, page 111)

Subsequent Chinese travellers to India like I Ching (I Ching or Yi Jing, Yìjìng, Yiqing, I-Tsing or YiChing), were more about Buddhism the religion that it had become, instead of a school of learning and thought. I Ching also recorded details of the works and life of Bhartrhari, the (probably) 5th century grammarian and poet. His take away from India, from Nalanda“in ten years (A.D. 675-685), during which he collected there some 400 Sanskrit texts amounting to 500,000 slokas.”

Takshashila lying at the cross roads of the Uttarapatha (West calls it The Silk Route) – from Tibet, China, Central Asia, Iran – and India, fell to this mindless savagery, goes the ‘modern’ narrative. But specifically, there is no mention in Chinese, Persian, Indian texts (that I could find) of the Hunas who destroyed Takshashila. So, how and where did this story spring from?

Kanishka, a major Buddhist king, was a Yue Chi, known as Tusharas in India, related to the White Huns. Why would his tribal cousins destroy Takshashila?

History as propaganda

We have the ‘imaginative genius’ of Sir John Marshall to thank for this – a man who was“interested in Alexander’s campaign and in Graeco-Buddhist monuments at Sanchi and Taxila.” Sir John, who was “filled with enthusiasm for anything Greek” was also aware that it was at “Taxila that Alexander the Great halted and refreshed his army before advancing to do battle with Porus.” Not one to stoop below self-aggrandisement, he counts himself among the “few archaeologists now living who have devoted as many years to the excavation of a single site as I have devoted to Taxila.” He lays out the ground for the ‘destroyer White Huns’ theory, describing how

Thirty two coins, all of them silver, leave no room for doubt it was it was the White Huns who were responsible for the wholesale destruction of the Buddhist sangharamas of Taxila … several skeletons of those who fell in the fight, including one of White Hun, were lying. (ellipsis mine; from Taxila by Sir John Marshall page 791).

Join the gang!

A chorus of historians joined in Sir John’s smear campaign (published between 1940-1951) against the White Huns who were ‘guilty’ of ‘destruction of Takshashila’. Sir John lays the burden of guilt at the doorstep of the Hunas (Western history calls them White Huns, Romans called them Ephtalites; Arabs called them the Haytal; The Chinese Ye Tha). Not surprising, since both ,

“Indian and foreign archaeologists often invoked invasion /diffusion as tools for explaining away the origins of fully-fledged archaeological cultures ranging in age from the Lower Paleolithic to the early historic period as well as individual traits concerning pottery, technology and other aspects. Africa, West and Central Asia and Europe were the favourite source areas. (From Theory in Archaeology: A World Perspective By Peter J. Ucko, page 132)

Lower Paleolithic is about 250,000 years ago and early historic period in India is 3000 years ago. Based on traveller’s tall tales, we have ‘modern’ historians who have depicted, without any evidence, that the

And this is from a book which claims to be a “historical survey of the destruction of knowledge from ancient Babylon and China to modern times”. Another book seeking to capture Central Asian history writes that these Hunas,who came,

sacking monasteries and works of art, and ruining the fine Greco-Buddhic civilization which by then was five centuries old. Persian and Chinese texts agree in their descriptions of the tyranny and vandalism of this horde.” (from The Empire of the Steppes By Rene Grousset, Naomi Walford).

It has been pointed out that

Although the exact relationship between the Buddhist communities of the Peshawar basin and the new Hun dynasty is not entirely clear, there is considerable evidence to suggest that Buddhism continued under Hun rule … (there is) textual evidence to show that Chinese Buddhist pilgrims continued to visit Gandharan sites in the Peshawar Basin into the early sixth century C.E.; The Bhamala main stupa can be compared to the 7th to 8th century cruciform stupas in Kashmir, Afghanistan, and other parts of Central Asia. (from The Buddhist architecture of Gandhāra By Kurt A. Behrendt pages 207-209).

Technically, it was also pointed out that Sir John did not stratify his digs, which creates a dating and sequencing problem. Going with self-aggrandizing nature, Sir John also focussed on ‘glamourous digs’ – without focussing on the connectivity issues.

Alexander in colonial historical narrative

For more on the decline of Takshashila, it is Alexander that we must turn to.

The 'Alexander mosaic', discovered in Pompeii

Alexander has long been a vital cog in Western colonial narrative of history. Alexander’s halo gave bragging rights – first to the Greco-Romans and then to the Euro-colonialists.

To these lean pickings, Alexander’s reaction – “the Macedonians frequently massacred the defenders of the city, especially in India.” What was Alexander’s response to a ‘sub-continent occupied by a complex network of peoples and states, who viewed Alexander as a new piece to be played in their complex political chess game.’ Another modern historian, an expert on Greek history writes that ‘the tale of slaughter told in the ancient sources is unparalleled elsewhere in the campaign.’ ( from Ancient Greece By Sarah B. Pomeroy, Stanley M. Burstein, Walter Donlan).

And arising from this frustration, came Alexander’s wanton massacres at Takshashila – which thereafter limped along for the next 1000 years, but never to fully recover.

Takshashila – the pattern!

One must also recall that Alexander’s behaviour in Babylon – a intellectual freeport, city ‘under the protection’ of code of ‘kidinnu’. The code of ‘kidinnu’ allowed creation of sanctuaries where weapons and arms were not allowed. The religious persecution by Alexander of the Zoroastrians (as per the Zoroastrian accounts) bears out Alexander’s wanton cruelty. As a modern researcher, Jona Lendering writes,

the Zoroastrian tradition is unanimous that Alexander ‘killed several high priests and judges and priests and the masters of the Magians and upholders of the religion’ (Book of Arda Wiraz1.9), ‘quenched many sacred fires’ (Great Bundahishn 33.14) and ’caused great devastation (Denkard 4.16 and 7.7.3). This ‘evil-destined and raging villain’ (Denkard 8.pr.20) was not just regarded as a collaborator of Angra Mainyu, but as one one of the calamities that the evil one had sent to earth to destroy what is good. Alexander even received the surname Guzastag, the Accursed, a title that had until then only been used to describe Angra Mainyu. It is possible -perhaps even likely- that several apocalyptic texts from the Avesta were composed during the reign of Alexander.

BCHP 1: Alexander Chronicle (obverse; **) Photo coutesy livius.org

A set of Babylonian tablets, published in 1975, the Alexander Chronicles, mention that Alexander killed Kidinnu – most probably the famed Babylonian astronomer.

The most authentic link to his reign is the Bhitari seal inscription, (near Ghazipur, in modern UP). The Bhitari seal provided proof of an elongated Gupta reign – than the Skandagupta-was-the-end-of-Gupta dynasty dating. Currently dated between 467 AD, Purugupta’s reign saw many border wars.

Is it that the Porus identified by the Greeks, Purugupta? Were the marauding soldiers, mentioned in Chinese texts, mercenary soldiers hired by Alexander to replace the ‘deserting’ Greek’ soldiers, on the eve of his Indian ‘campaign’? The dating of the Gupta dynasty to end of the 5th century AD, is probably off by about 800 years.

The Indian defence system

Taksashila’s destruction raises an obvious question! And also important. What did Indian polity do to defend centres of excellence like Takshashila?

For instance, against the Assyrian invasion, led by Semiramis, a minor Indian king, Stabrobates, was supported to beat back the Assyrian invasion. Against Cyrus the Great, Tomyris, a Scythian Queen was supported to massacre Persian invaders. Alexander’s nightmare began immediately, as soon as he crossed from the Persian area into the area governed by the Medes – an Indic area.

End of Crassus

Laurence Oliver as Crassus in Spartacus

Less than 300 years after Alexander, Romans came close to Indian border. They were led by Marcus Licinius Crassus – estimated (or allegedly) worth 200,000,000 sestertii. A writer of classical journals estimated that to be worth about 7.6 million in 1860. Inflation adjusted, about 7.6 billions. Source of Crassus’ wealth – slavery, corruption, pillage, bribery et al. Crassus is more famous in history for three things – One, for his wealth, Two – for having crucified thousands of rebellious slaves on the Via Appia, after defeating Spartacus’ Slave Army and Three, as the man who funded the rise of Julius Caesar.

The rise of religion in India

Without access to the ‘Indian thought factory’, after the fall of Takshashila, in 499 AD – by the Huna (dating as per Western history which calls them White Huns, Romans called them Ephtalites; Arabs called them the Haytal; The Chinese Ye Tha) Buddhism soon became a religion. Buddha in India, was another, in a long line of teachers. But in the rest of world, Buddhism soon became a religion.

The destruction of Takshashila (Taxila) meant that students and scholars would need to travel for an extra 60 days to reach the other Indian Universities of the time. This was a traumatic event in the status of the Indian ethos – even the Asiatic ethos.

The decline of Taksashila marked the destruction, persecution and decline in Indian education, thought and structure. Fewer believers in Indian faith systems made the trip to India. ‘Consumers’ of ideological products from the ‘Indian Thought Factory’, were left with Desert Bloc alternative products. Buddhism soon became a religion outside India. A few centuries after decline of Takshashila, Nalanda, etc. were also destroyed by Desert Bloc invaders.

Travels of Fah-Hian and Sung-Yun, Buddhist pilgrims from China to India (400 …

India as a seat of learning is very facinating to me. I have associated with several Indian scholars (both Tamil) who say that Mayasura – the great architect, poet, and scientist) had an academy at around 10,000. This is an approximate date determined by astronomical evidence and texts that describe the first sangam to be at that time. He wrote the Pranava Veda, the Aintiram, the Surya Siddhanta treatis on astronomy, and over 30 other texts on science, mathematics, art, and architecture.

Mayan aparrently had 12 major students who were well trained in mathematics, architecture, painting, herbology, ship building, geology, space science and a number of other sujects.

He traveled from kumari continent through southern India and settled at the foothills of the great mountains in Brahmavarta. There is some thought that he was the designer and builder of Mohendo jaro. He is also said to be the person called Ahura Mazda (asura Mayan)

His writings and teachings were said to span the world. In fact there is evidence in Mexico, Peru, Bosnia and throughout the world that Mayan’s teachings affected world culture beyond imagination.

It would be too long a discussion here to go into more depth but from my research and from the research of my Tamil friends including the legandary V. Ganapati Sthapati (recent recipiant of Padma Bushan) India just might be the origin of world culture. The links are astonishing.

The research you are doing is brilliant. It adds to the concept that India is the source of ancient and profound world culture and education. Please keep going. YOu reasoning and logic will dispell world ignorance.

One of the most ignored aspects of Indian history is the so-called ‘Dravidian’ contribution to Indian history. Apparently, it appears that there were significant developments in the ‘Dravidian’ culture – the Elam Empire and its influence in the Central Asia, right up to the Urals. Most Central Asian and Uralaic languages have significant contributions from Tamil /Brahmi /Kharoshti scripts and languages. India(ns) have ignored this phase of development – and it will come out sooner rather than later.

But the importance of history is not archaeology or artifacts – but in learning from the past. And I think that is something that the Indian Puranas worked on. History as a moral lesson – is the thinking behind the Puranas. Unlike Western history, which over-emphasises dates, time, place, weather, climate, individuals – as a series of successive and random events.

Pauranik historiography is focussed on the evolution and learning from those events. Mayasura makes some very intriguing appearances in the various Sanskrit texts. I am sure there is more where this comes from. There are more than 150,000 Indian ancient texts which are awaiting publication and translation. I am sure there once India gets serious about it, another 1 million such texts will come out.

I gave the incomplete date of Mayan’s journey through India and the rest of the world – it is estimated to be 10,500 BC

Just during the deluge covering much of Asia that happened about 10,500 – 11,000 BC due to the melting ice caps.

Dravidian culture was far more sophisticated than anyone can imagine.

Mayan also had, among his 12 major students, a student named Maayan. It is he whom we are thinking traveled to Mexico and central Americas and taught Mayonic Science from which the Maayan culture of Mexico was born.

The art and architecture of that region are distinctly related to Indian art and architecture. In addition many words are similar. For example, Chidambarum – the beautiful and ancient temple in Tamil Nadu is encoded with information that relates to Quantum physics and of course profound spiritual information. The Maayan culture has a sacred text called Chilam Balam- a most revered text of the Maayan culture.

10,000 BC – MMM.. >> However – Mayan is ALSO said to have been in ATTENDANCE in Yudhistir’s Court – Not earlier than 3,200 BC along with Krsna and Arjuna and so has never been described as being 7,000 years old in Krsna’s time…..

According to the ancient texts, Mayasura also known as Mamuni Mayan, Brahmarishi Mayan, Vishwakarma, and Vishwabrahmin, came to the Indian mainland from Jamboodwepa a former piece of Kumari continent when Jamboodweepa was overtaken by the seas. He was dark skinned like Tamils. He wore dreadlocks and is depicted throughout India as Dakshinamurti at various temples. He taught in south India in an academy format. He presented his Aintiram (of which copies have been printed in modern time) during the first sangam which was conducted according to the literature around 10,000 BC in an ancient city called Madurai which was overteken by the ocean (the present day Madurai is not the same city). The approximate date is derived through the literature, the astronomical events, and the king who sponsored the sangam.

That city was part of India at the time. Jamboodweepa, while part of Kumari Continent, may also have been part of India. Mayan taught in south India and moved north to Brahmavarta. (foothills of the great mountain range in northern India). His 12 major students were sent to various parts of the world to teach (including to Mexico and Peru) what might be called Mayonic Science and Technology. If you are interested in more information please go to http://www.aumscience.com and then click on the bookstore. Then click on a book called “Fabric of the Universe” if you say you are Indian and live in India and then remind me that I said I would send you a free copy of the book I will send it in pdf form. It is quite interesting. It outlines the principle teachings of Mayan and you will see the impact that those teachings have had on world knolwedge.

For all practical purposes, Mayasura was an Indian I would think.

In any case, it is India that has preserved his teachings and the first Veda which he cognized called the Pranava Veda. (only one copy exists)

According to you “Mayasura” is not Indian Right? Please clarify.
or
Mayasura , came to the Indian mainland from Jamboodwepa a former piece of Kumari continent, then where is Kumari Continent? Kumari is India word right?

Kumari is a southern landmass (Yes,it is a part of India) that is now in the seas due to rising water levels. Mayan was born in that area and travelled his way to the Northern India spreading his knowledge along with other gurus.

this so called kumari kandam is nothing but another another attempt by those loony “dravidian” scholars and dmk wallas to increase Tamil antiquity to prehistoric times. all this rubbish had its orgin in the 19th century when european scholars (max mullers & his ilk) concoted the aryan – dravidian theory. after that all these koonky scholars have had a field day. Extant tamil books talk of land lost to sea, nobody mentions any such accounts of a fantastical “tamil” home. Lemuria, gondwanaland, Kumari Kandam, centra asia, & now Africa (read afro-dalit) etc. etc. etc. Anything but India, that is the thrust. and their is no such thing as a separate “dravidian” culture. all a load of rubbish.

‘this so called kumari kandam is nothing but another another attempt by those loony “dravidian” scholars and dmk wallas to increase Tamil antiquity to prehistoric times’

There seems to be no necessity to prove Tamil antiquity, since it is being proved all over the world (Read history books and not some fanatic magazines)

‘all this rubbish had its orgin in the 19th century when european scholars (max mullers & his ilk) concoted the aryan – dravidian theory.’

Max Muller actually gave two rubbish theories about MST (Mother Sanskrit Theory) and the world famous AIT (Aryan Invasion Theory). Both have been disproved as fake or impossible. Now what do you have to say for that.

‘after that all these koonky scholars have had a field day’

yes of course! they had their field day saying that the Sans language came from Europe, and people like you went behind them getting totally messed up about the true history of our country.

‘Extant tamil books talk of land lost to sea, nobody mentions any such accounts of a fantastical “tamil” home.’

Mr. Raman, do you read history books, update youself of latest discoveries about history etc. or are you still relying of TV channels like cartoon network, pogo etc. See, you dont get information about the above in these channels. To know whether the above is true or false, you need to read a lot of books, get in touch with atleast one person who can read ancient texts and interpret the exact meaning.

‘and their is no such thing as a separate “dravidian” culture. all a load of rubbish.’

You can call this statement as the ‘state of ultimate ignorance’. Not wanting to know the truth but blabbering. You dont wish to update yourself, so you say its rubbish.

In fact, I tell you, there was a separate “Dravidian Culture” which influenced most of the Indian culture to what it is today, either the non dravidians accepted it directly or inspired it in its negative form, just like you do.

I agree with most of what you said except that there was a “separate” Dravidian culture. This Dravidian theory is a figment of imagination created by “scholar-evangelist” from the Anglican Church, Bishop Robert Caldwell (1814-91), who pioneered what now flourishes as the “Dravidian” identity. In his Comparative Grammar of the Dravidian Race, he argued that the south Indian mind was structurally different from the Sanskrit mind. Linguistic speculations were turned into a race theory. He characterized the Dravidians as “ignorant and dense,” accusing the Brahmins — the cunning Aryan agents — for keeping them in shackles through the imposition of Sanskrit and its religion. This was based only on the now debunk Aryan Invasion theory but some people continue to believe in it for selfish reasons. So, the modern day adherents of Dravidian theory are basing their view on the debunked Aryan invasion theory. BOTH ARYANS AND DRAVIDIAN are one and the same people, the people of India.

Meanwhile, this Dravidian theory has no basis on the linguistic, archaeological, textual, and genetic evidence. e.g. look at the work done by Stephen Oppenheimer, his work and many genetic studies prove that the genetic pool of India has remained unchanged for the last 10,000 years or so so if there was a so-called Aryan invasion happened, why is the genetic pool unchanged? Many years ago, after reading various texts and traveling extensively throughout India and the world, Swami Vivekananda rightfully also believed that Aryanization of India did happen BUT it was not some alien Aryans but it was the thought process and ideology developed by the rishis and saints of India. That continues on even today.

The Poonool Venom alone is displayed here by Mr. Raman. These saffron terrorists believe that by capturing the power centres, they can twist the historical facts and continue to enslave the Non-Brahmins by arrogating the priesthood only for themselves. The fanatical apartheid practised by these terrorists stand exposed in this internet age.

Yes. I see your point. But just imagine. Entire Western historiography of the last 150 years becomes a waste. All these ‘great’ books on history will stand exposed as works of fiction – which they were in the first place.

and their is no such thing as a separate “dravidian” culture. all a load of rubbish.

I think, that again you are right. There is the Indian culture which has grown, evolved – and people seem to feel threatened by it. Hence the efforts to mangle it.

[…] details (at the lower half of the page) Thomas was in Bharat under the service of the king of Takshashila (where he likely heard of the Nasarene Jews), after which he moved into the southern parts of […]

As far as I know, Thomas is buried in Madras. I read an article in a BACK TO GOHEAD magazine inthe late 70s also, the magazine edited by His Divine Grace A. C. Bhaktivedanta Swami Prabhupada, that after leaving Taxila, Alexander had sent an ambassador there to build a column to honour Krishna. It was discovered by Sir Alfred Stein in 1901, so the article informed in the said magazine.

i have some questions about caste system. have you
done any research on caste system.
in my state andhra pradesh there are komats who are black in color
but they are high caste.they do business. they dont eat meat and do lots of religious stuff like vratas. they follow many rules and keep their houses clean.
who were these komats.they also happen to know many points about our scriptures. they worship vishnu a lot and have their daughters named vaishnavi a lot.
where they the dravidians that the tamil guy speaks of.
i have heard tamils say that shiva is dravidian and vishnu is aryan. how can this be. arent shiva’s sites mainly in north india in kashi and himalayas.
why are some brahmins black while some are white.
people of many other castes are also of various colours rather than all black or all white.
so then the racial aryan dravid theorists must be wrong right?
has anyone studied all the castes and their histories and habits and found anything supporting distinct dravidian aryan theory.

[…] After the destruction of Takshashila, in 499 AD(?), without access to the ‘Indian thought factory’, Buddhism soon became a religion outside India. Buddha in India, was another, in a long line of teachers. Not so in the rest of the world. Cut off from Indian philosophy, Buddhism soon stopped growing. […]

Buddhism was wiped out by Islam..no question about it..the great centres of buddhism in Indian subcontinent were Gandhar, Kashmir, Swat, Bihar, Bengal, Somnath,Andhara pradesh etc.. and today these lands are hard core islamic..I hope u find the answer in it..

sub-continent occupied by a complex network of peoples and states, who viewed Alexander as a new piece to be played in their complex political chess game.

why do i get the feeling that this happened again with indira gandhi.
who gets to be the loser by playing complex chess games.
Vivekananda said that as long as India remains true to herself. all attempts made by foreigners are futile. India should remain true to her ideals.

idealists are better and more powerful than all the chess game players.

1. Tomyris was from the Massagetae /Massaga tribe. This tribe was to subsequently again make a lot of trouble for Alexander also.

2. Most classical sources mention Indian elephants as crucial part of the Tomyris-Cyrus Battle. Classical allusions to Tomyris also show Tomyris with severed head of Cyrus in her hands – a key representation of Mahishasurmardini, a Durga representation.

3. The Cyrus-Tomyris Battle happened around Dassehra – which is when Mahishasurmnardini is worshipped.

4. Centred in the triangle of Takshashila, Kashmir to Turkmenistan, the Indo-Shakyas exist even today in India and Nepal. Many use their tribal name of Shakya as a surname.

5. If you account for the fact that Persian replaces ‘sha’ sound with ‘ha’ sound, even the Hakhmanish Dynasty of Cyrus would be read as Shakmanish – or Shakyamanush. So, probably Cyrus was proposing a political-marital alliance to another Scythian tribal queen.

6. The most famous is of course Shakya-muni – Gautama Buddha. And interesting are the verbal and figurative clues in Buddha’s life story. Buddha’s mother dreamt of Airavata (White Elephant) entering her womb – and Prince Gautama was born later. The linkage between elephants and India goes back to Indus Valley which is at least 2000 years before Buddha. So, was the Scythian Queen was impregnated by the idea of ‘India’?

7. Buddha’s father was Shuddhodhana – meaning clean money. So, the Indo-Scythians differentiated themselves in how they got their money. Without slavery, I presume. And there are many more markers, that the biggest source of pain for the royal Shakya household, was when Gautama Buddha defected from the tribal Scythian values – and adopted the idea of Dharma. This becomes easy to understand if you equate dharma with Bharattantra.

Coming to Parthians.

There is a much confusion on Parthians.

1. Indian classical texts which predate the settlement of exiled Ionian Greeks in Bactra, refer to elephant-riding Yavanas. Now we know that there were no elephant riding Greeks.

2. So, possibly, there were Yavanas in that region before the Greeks came. Who also started calling themselves Yavanas – and their place in Mediterranean as Ionia.

3. Similarly there are Parthavas who predate all these battles and history in Indian classical history.

4. Subsequently there were clearly a Hellenized Parthian faction.

5. And then there were the Parthian and Bactrian cavalry which rode with Xerxes in his wars with Greece; who fought with Darius under the command of Bessos at Gaugamela – against Alexander.

6. The first historic evidence of the toe-stirrup is found in India.

7. Famed cavalry fighters, the Indo-Parthians were among the first users of the toe stirrup – if not the inventors. Their most famous maneuver is known in modern times as the Parting Shot.

Pls check out this post below which has numerous links – both modern and classical on some of the above aspects.

Dear Anurang
Thank you very much for your reply…..your effort and evidences are notably sufficient and I am fully satisfied…for if I had quoted your assertions and yet proved unable to back them..I would have looked stupid…

I have a suggestion you are free to reject…..Why not explain in an article how Attila the Hun ravaged Rome while Yashodharman defeated and chased away Mihirakula the Hun…..who was far more cruel and wicked than Attila.(unless you have done it already)
It would be a conclusive case to prove that Rome was not a challenge for the Empires that ruled from Magadh…

I agree with you completely. And leftists in India will do anything to ensure this is not taught to us in schools and these numberless atrocities forgotten.

Arun Shouri, in his famous book Eminent Historians, has quoted the West Bengal circular regarding Sudho-Ashudho and has given appalling examples of the leftist ‘objectivity’ and sense of history. The state government issued circulars to schools to delete portions from the text books which described any act of conversions, butchery, plunder and rapes by the Muslim rulers. The logic given was that these encourage communalism and hate against Muslims. The terms used were ‘Aushuddho’ – the text which depicted the history as it is and ‘Shuddho’ – delete or make corrections to the history of actual events!
A circular sent relating to textbooks for class ix, dated 28 April 1989, issued by West Bengal Secondary Board, and it carries a number ‘sy1/89/1’ says “all the West Bengal government recognized secondary school headmasters are being informed’ it begins, ‘ that in history textbooks recommended by this board for class ix the following amendments to the chapter on the medieval period have been decided after due discussions and review by experts’.
‘the authors and publishers of class ix history textbooks,’ it continues, ‘are being requested to incorporate the amendments if books published by them have these ‘aushuddho’ (impurities/errors) in all subsequent editions, and paste a corrigendum in books which have already been published. A copy of the book with the corrigendum should be deposited with the syllabus office’.
The accompanying pages contain two columns: aushuddho – and shuddho. We need to just glance through the changes to see the objective the progressive are trying to achieve through their ‘objective’, ‘rational’ & ‘secular’ approach to the writing to history.
Book: Bharat Katha, prepared by the Burdwan education society, techers enterprise, published by Sukhomoy Das:
Page 140: Aushuddho – “in Sindhudesh the Arabs did not describe Hindus as kafir. They had banned cow-slaughter”.
Shuddho – “delete, ‘they had banned cow-slaughter’”
Page 141: Aushuddho – “fourthly, using force to destroy Hindu temples was also an expression of aggression. Fifthly, forcibly marrying Hindu women and converting them to Islam before marriage was another way to propagate the fundamentalism of the ulema”
Shuddho – delete from “secondly… to Ulema”
Aushuddho – “the logical, philosophical, materialist mutazilla disappeared. On the one hand, the fundamentalist thinking based on the Quran and the badis…”
Shuddho – delete
Book: Bharatvarsher itihash, by Dr. Narendranath Bhattacharya, published by Chakravarty:
Page 89: Aushuddho – “Sultan Mahmud used force for widespread murder, loot, destruction and conversion”.
Shuddho – “there was widespread loot and destruction by Mahmud”. i.e., no reference to killing, no reference to forcible conversions.
Aushuddho – “he looted valuable worth 2 crore dirham from the Somnath temple and used the Shivling as a step leading up to the masjid in Ghazni”
Shuddho – “delete ‘and used the Shivling as a step…”
Page 112: Aushuddho – “Hindu-Muslim relation of the medieval ages constitute a very sensitive issue. The non-believers had to embrace Islam or death”
Shuddho – all matter on pages 112-13 to be deleted
Page 113: Aushuddho – “according to Islamic law non-Muslims will have to choose between death and Islam. Only the Hanafis allow non-Muslims to pay Jaziya in exchange for their lives”.
Shuddho – rewrite this as follows: “by paying Jaziya to Alauddin Khalji, Hindus could lead normal lives”. Moreover, all the subsequent sentences “quazi…”, “Taimur’s arrival in India…” to be deleted.
Aushuddho – “Mahmud was a believer in the rule of Islam whose core was either Islam or death”
Shuddho – delete.
Book: Itihasher Kahini, by Nalini Bhushan Dasgupta, published by B.B.Kumar:
Page 132: Aushuddho – “according to Todd [the famous chronicler of Rajasthan annals] the purpose behind Alauddin’s Chittor expedition was to secure Rana Rattan Singh’s beautiful wife, Padmini”.
Shuddho – delete
Page 154: Aushuddho – “as dictated by Islam, there were three options for non-Muslims: get yourself converted to Islam; pay Jaziya; accept death. In an Islamic state non-Muslims had to accept one of these three options.”
Shuddho – delete
Page 161: Aushuddho – “the early sultans were eager to expand the sway of Islam by forcibly converting Hindus into Islam”. Shuddho – delete.
Book: Bharuter Itihash, by P.Maiti, Sreedhar Prakashini:
Page 139: Aushuddho – “there was a sense of aristocratic superiority in the Purdah system. That is why upper-class Hindus adopted this system for upper-class Muslims. Another opinion has it that Purdha came into practice to save Hindu women from Muslims. Most probably, purdah came into vogue because of both factors”. Shuddho – delete.
The most extensive deletions are ordered in regard to the chapter on ‘Aurangzeb’s policy on religion’. Every allusion to what he actually did to the Hindus, to their temples, to the very leitmotif of his rule – to spread the sway of Islam – are directed to be excised from the book. He is to be presented as one who had an aversion – an ordinary sort of aversion, almost a secular one – to music and dancing, to the presence of prostitutes in the court, and that it is these things he banished.
Book: swadesho shobhyota, by Dr. PK Basu and SB Ghatak, abhinav prakashan:
Page 126: Aushuddho – “some people believe that Alauddin’s Mewar expedition was to get hold of Padmini, the wife of Rana Rattan Singh”. Shuddho – delete
Page 145: Aushuddho – “apart from this, because Islam used extreme, inhuman means to establish itself in India, this became an obstacle for the coming together of Indian and Islamic cultures.”. shuddho – delete
Book: Bharat Katha, by G. Bhattacharya, Bulbul Prakashan
Page 40: Aushuddho – “Muslims used to take recourse to torture and inhuman means to force their religious beliefs and practices on Indians”. Shuddho – delete.
Page 41: Aushuddho – “the liberal, humane elements in Islam held our hope for oppressed Hindus”. Shuddho – the entire paragraph beginning with the “the caste system among Hindus… was attacked” is to be deleted. Instead write: there was no place for casteism in Islam. Understandably, the influence of Islam created an awakening among Hindus against caste discrimination. Lower caste oppressed Hindus embraced islam”.
Page 77: Aushuddho – “his main task was to oppress non-believers, especially Hindus”. Shuddho – this and the preceding sentence to be deleted.
Looking at all these changes convey us one single motto. That no forcible conversions, no massacres, no destruction of temples. Just that Hinduism had created an exploitative, casteist society. Islam was egalitarian. Hence the oppressed Hindus embraced Islam! Such cleansing act of our history has not just happened at West Bengal alone. There are innumerable examples across India in all the states for such changes with ‘malicious’intentions.
The question is “are we Indians not privileged enough to know the true History of our nation?” Is it right that the ‘never-stepped-in-to-school’ ministers of this country change the history for minority appeasement? BJP has called for the eradication of such cheap practices and they are blamed for ‘saffronizing’ the education! Now if Saffronization is going to give us our ‘history’ as it is without changes, what is there to oppose it? Is it not good for our country?

Reblogged this on Echoes In Truth and commented:
This article presents a summary glimpse of the overlap of India’s history with that of Greece and Persia, over a span of a millenium, specifically around that great university at Takshashila.

Dear Anuraag,
Your 2nd look at Indian History is fabulous. Though late in the game, I am glad I came to know about your articles. With the sad state of affairs in India, where generations of students are still being taught AIT/AMT without as much a caveat, your articles come as a ray of hope to millions like me who want to have a 2nd look at Indian history.
One question-
Ambi is the king of Takshasila. Alexander forged an alliance with him for logistic support. All good.
Than why would Alexander destroy an academy in the allied country?
Even if we assume Purugupta as Porus, who is Ambi than? How do we account for Ambi’s reign of Takshasila?

Please understand that I am not questioning your perspectives on the Macedonian invasion of India.
Let’s say I am playing the role of Devil’s Advocate here:).

Dear Gopi, infact, it wasn´t a Macedonia invasion. Alexander sent an Ambassado to Takshshila, after he left it. He wasn´t a Macedonia as fact either but a universal man. He was the disciple to Aristotle!.

Dear Anurag,
Thanks for all your articles for making making my journey of relearning Indian history through critical angle, starting from the elective courses in my engineering curricula, gain a firm perspective! It ties so many loose end and I cannot thank you enough for that.

So are you pointing at towards the change in the sheet anchor of Indian history here by mentioning a discrepancy of 800 years in the “currently taught” and the “emperical evidence” based history?

This is interesting blog but I have serious doubts over this line of looking at history with sole intention of making Indian out of everything …like scythians are Indian Sakyas and Indo-parthians etc. Is there any evidence of these folks had any conections with India.Scythians are recorded as invaders in Indian history , you are making them to look like Indians

Scythians followed Hinduism and Buddhism and pagan Indo-european religions and Buddhist artifacts of Scythians have been found as far away as Denmark. The Indo-Europeans migrated out of India into Siberia and Central Asia and re-merged as groups like the Scythians, Alans, Sarmatians, Cimmerians etc etc. The Scythians were basically the Albino Indians from India.

The whole claim of Huna destroying “Taxila is without legs” is without legs. He offers no contradiction as to the findings and jumps around about Alexander killing Zorastarians nor offers any other theory with convincing proof.

Get a 2ndlook on

Email Subscription

2ndlook Blogs

Quicktake focusses more on current events, recent events, reports, media buzz, matters of topical interests. Typically, Quicktakes are shorter than 2ndlook. Sometimes a few Quicktakes, morph into a 2ndlook post.